Sharks still not expected to turn profit, CEO says

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Dave is a killer, Oct 12, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dave is a killer

    Dave is a killer Dave's a Mess

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2002
    Messages:
    26,462
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    171
    Location:
    Mount Juliet
    Home Page:
  2. garypl

    garypl Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2005
    Messages:
    138
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Isles no profit either

    Islanders arent expected to have a profit either(15 million loss this year)
     
  3. USF Shark

    USF Shark Zôion politikòn

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2005
    Messages:
    22,185
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    114
    Location:
    DC Area
    take the Sharks losses with a LARGE grain of salt (either kosher or sea salt will be large enough ;) ) we've come to...be somewhat untrusting of Greg Jamison and his financials...
     
  4. Hawker14

    Hawker14 Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,085
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    the ole' "we will lose money this year".

    typical owner of a private sports team in meeting with executive staff - "we wanted a profit of $ 40 million, but only made $ 25 million, so let's issue a press release saying we lost $ 15 million so we will need to raise ticket prices !!!"
     
  5. It Kills Me

    It Kills Me Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    10,789
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  6. It Kills Me

    It Kills Me Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    10,789
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why are the owners still *****ing?
     
  7. Falloooooon

    Falloooooon Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Sharks have a separate entity, Silicon Valley Sports and Entertainment (??), acronym is SVSE at least. I am certain that they are able to use that to claim profits while still saying the "Sharks" lost money.

    Because if they couldn't make money last season, going all the way in the conference finals (claimed they lost 7 mil), they should just fold the team because it isn't capable of turning a profit.

    Liars, plain and simple.
     
  8. Spungo*

    Spungo* Guest

    There is no doubt that some teams will still lose money. If NHL teams never lost money, nobody would ever sell them. At least before the new CBA, the idea of running an NHL team was the probably the single worst business proposition on earth.
     
  9. Captain Ron

    Captain Ron Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2003
    Messages:
    17,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Gardnerville, NV
    Home Page:
    Except now with cost certainty the only ones that will lose money are the poorly run teams.
     
  10. Falloooooon

    Falloooooon Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If a team is making money, the money which can be earned by selling the team at a much higher price than what was paid is often greater than what you would get collecting profits for many years.

    NFL teams can't lose money, and they get sold because some guy bought it for 100M way back and can sell if for 800M now.
     


  11. The NFL blows the NHL, NBA and MLB out of the water when it comes to making money though. It makes more money every year than some 3rd world countries. It's the closest thing America has to a national sport. By far.

    I would be interested to see the potential selling price of the NFL franchises...
     
  12. It Kills Me

    It Kills Me Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    10,789
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Around 300 M I believe is the price it'd cost you for the Washington Red Skins ..

    Quick folks, buy your powerball tickets !!
     
  13. Falloooooon

    Falloooooon Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So? The concept is the same, only on a smaller scale. If somebody paid $90M for an NHL team recently, but thanks to the CBA will be able to get $135M in the near future, the extra $45M would probably take almost ten years to make in profit.
     
  14. Falloooooon

    Falloooooon Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Missed the mark there by a wee bit. Dan Snyder paid $800M for the Redskins in 1999.

    Forbes magazine's most recent valuations of NFL teams placed the Redskins as being worth $1.1B.
     
  15. Spungo*

    Spungo* Guest

    Why not wait 5 years, rake in 22.5M, then sell it for a 160M-170M? You don't think a guaranteed investment like that would drop in value over 5 years, do you? Especially sports teams, which are some of the most overvalued propeties known to man because they make great toys for billionaires.

    NHL teams are not guaranteed investments. They are pretty much the worst investment anyone can have. I have zero doubt that the teams who claim to lose money actually do loose bucketloads of money. There's no reason for a Walmart or a Disney to abandon a guaranteed money maker. They cut things that bleed red ink, like those 2 hockey teams did and still do.

    If Disney and Walmart had 2 investments that were guaranteed to make money every year and guaranteed to rise in value, they would not have sold them. They didn't need the quick cash.
     
  16. Falloooooon

    Falloooooon Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Your points are not without merit. But what I am talking about is what really happens. It's just the way it is. NFL teams get bought and sold, even though the owner could just sit there and make money for 5 more years and then sell. There are lots of things which go into the decision to sell a team besides if it is losing money.

    And by the same logic, hockey teams can't be such bad investments if people buy them. While it is an industry fueled by attendance and not TV, I think people underestimate how much money these teams can haul in with ticket prices, parking, concessions, merchandise, etc.

    I'm sure some teams lose money, but losing is not guaranteed.
     
  17. Spungo*

    Spungo* Guest

    Fair enough. Believe me, I'm not in denial about how much cash the Leafs are rolling in every year. The teachers of Ontario must live like Kings and Queens in retirement. I wonder how things like games on Pay Per View and forcing fans to pay for Leafs TV to watch 13 games will be accepted by the Toronto hockey public now that we know all that extra money doesn't buy us a better team, as it did in the past. It's just more gravy for MLSE and the teachers.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"